So let me get this straight...
Drawing a CARTOON of Mohammed is “asking for it”...it is the equivalent of shouting “fire” in a theater (so we’re told).
...doesn’t this kinda highlight the fact that there’s a *problem* with Islam?
The left is contradicting themselves. You can’t say Islam is a peaceful religion and then say “you should have known” insulting them would cause violence. Nobody expects that from Christians.
Free speech is only important when it is offensive, otherwise you don’t have free speech. Drawing cartoons is not hurting anybody. You have the right to offend, the right to be offended and the right to be offended at someones offense!! ...nobody has the right to decide what can be said. This is the most hypocritical thing I’ve ever seen from the left. I suppose Christians have been doing it all wrong...we should be violent when offended, then the left will shut up!!!
The media is bendover Barry’s megaphone
Media = PRAVDA just like old soviet union
no credibility and no integrity
The libtards are anti freedom a nd thus COMMON INTEREST COMMON CAUSE with Islam and jihadis.......
Obama is one of them .......
Remember to go to Geller’s website and post your supportive comments there as well.
Let the leftist loonies in the media know that Pam has millions of supporters.
Amazing how many so called conservatives and libertarians or even constitutionalist get confused about free speech.
The 1st Amendment is very simple. It states that Congress may pass no law that hinders the exercise of freedom of expression. That’s it. So these Mohamets did not attack the 1st amendment. The attacked Pamela’s group. She was not exercising her first amendment rights because that right restricts the government not the Muzies. Criminal law is there to restrict the Muzies from killing.
Only Congress and its various minions can violate the 1st Amendment. And, btw, that’s what the 2nd Amendment helps prevent.
It does not require the government to use force to protect anyone from the consequences of speech, association, assembly etc. There are laws that protect us from criminal acts. As we say hear in redneck country “your right to free speech ends at my fist”.
It’s the perfect combination of trashing the first amendment and engaging in the War on Women that Democrats accuse Republicans of doing constantly. Plus it’s the opportunity to engage in the “she asked for it” type of conversation that feminists always decry when Republicans speak it. Trifecta, remarkable.
Even Greta on Fox News piled on last night, saying it is good to stand up for free speech but it wasn’t good to put the lives of others (i.e., hired security) at risk; and sure, we have the right to free speech, but with rights come responsibilities (not to provoke?).
Shameful.
Face it: a large number of Muslims are unrepentant barbarians — they threaten violence if they are offended. They are encouraged to be barbaric by some of the writings and traditions of Islam. The remaining Muslims are encouraged by those same traditions to not criticize other Muslims when they are being barbaric.
Does a Civilized person have an obligation, legal or moral, to change their behavior in order to not offend a barbarian? I don’t think so.
One can make the case that barbarians should be deliberately “offended” so that they can be crushed when they initiate violence, and then any remaining barbarians will have an opportunity to reconsider their behavior.
Why aren’t they focusing on their dear leader who let ISIS penetrate OUR country?